Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Was privatizing Social Security a pre-bail out plan?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BornBlue Donating Member (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:37 PM
Original message
Was privatizing Social Security a pre-bail out plan?
I will openly admit that I do not know much about the economy, but this bail out plan got me thinking about how long they have known the system was close to collapse. Did the repubs know the laissez-faire party was about to end, and saw this as a loop hole to dump a large amount of liquid capitol into the market? If so, I am certainly glad that they did not get their way today. I know that A LOT of people are hurting, and a lot more will be very soon, but had we privatized social security, the effects on our retired citizens would have been catastrophic.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.cato.org/pubs/ssps/ssp7.html

Privatizing Social Security: The $10 Trillion Opportunity

As America moves into the 21st century, two public policy issues are becoming increasingly important: the need to reform Social Security and the need to spur economic growth and raise real wages. Recent evidence suggests that it may be possible to solve both problems simultaneously.

Our current Social Security system is acting as a drag on economic growth in two important ways. First, the payroll tax distorts the supply of labor and the type of compensation sought by workers. These losses are inevitable because of the low return implied by the pay-as-you-go character of the unfunded Social Security system. Second, the system reduces national savings and investment.

Privatizing Social Security, transforming it from an unfunded pay-as-you-go system to a system of mandatory private savings accounts, would solve both of those problems and increase economic growth.

Under the current Social Security system, each generation now and in the future loses the difference between the return to real capital that would be obtained in a funded system and the much lower return in the existing unfunded program. Shifting to a privatized system of individual mandatory accounts that can be invested in a mix of stocks and bonds would permit individuals to obtain the full real pretax rate of return on capital. This would mean a larger capital stock and a higher national income.

Conservative assumptions imply that Social Security privatization would raise the well-being of future generations by an amount equal to 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) each year as long as the system lasts. Although the transition to a funded system would involve economic as well as political costs, the net present value of the gain would be enormous—as much as $10-20 trillion.

Such a private savings program would solve Social Security's long-run financial problems without the necessity for either huge tax increases or draconian benefit cuts. At the same time, it would yield enormous benefits to the economy. In short, privatizing Social Security can increase real incomes for everyone while ensuring a dignified retirement for future retirees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. It was a junky burglarizing a house for another fix..n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BornBlue Donating Member (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It makes me sick to think
that instead of addressing the real problem, they would gamble away millions of citizens only means of a semi-decent retirement.

But then again they are repubs. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. You'll never convince me otherwise.
They've been priapic for the SS funds forever.

It's a wonder cartoon $s don't pop up in Republics eyes every time they hear the words "Social Security".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BornBlue Donating Member (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. LOVE the use of priapic!!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindPilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. That was merely their latest unsuccessful attempt
They really got started back in the early eighties when our nice, secure retirement pensions morphed into 401ks and suddenly we all had to become fund managers if we wanted to have any money to live on after work.

As I recall that was yet another "wall street can manage your money better than you or your local bank can" scam. Of course the local bank is gone too.

We really dodged a bullet today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BornBlue Donating Member (278 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Thank you for the background.
I was born it '85, so, yeah I am very new to this stuff. I am thanking my lucky stars today that I work for a private, employee owned company. We are not untouchable, but a little more stable.

Can't trust wall street, can't trust the government, I think we all need to start stuffing our mattresses!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Diadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. yes
and what's happening is exactly why I'm against privatization of SS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-08 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. It is STILL THE PLAN for republicans, they want to abolish Social Security
...and the 7.65% share that employers are required by law to match for every worker on the payroll. Employees pay 7.65% of what they earn as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC